首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>EFSA Journal >Evaluation of Alternative Methods of Tunnel Composting (submitted by the European Composting Network)
【2h】

Evaluation of Alternative Methods of Tunnel Composting (submitted by the European Composting Network)

机译:隧道堆肥替代方法评估(由欧洲堆肥网络提交)

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Two alternative methods for the production of compost from certain category 3 animal by‐products (catering waste and processed foodstuffs of animal origin) were assessed. The first proposed a minimum temperature of 55°C for 72 h; the second 60°C for 48 h, each with a maximum particle size of 200 mm. The proposed composting processes were assessed by the Panel for their efficacy to achieve a reduction of 5 log of or Senftenberg (775W, H S negative) and a 3 log reduction of the infectivity titre of thermoresistant viruses, such as parvovirus, in the composted material, as set out in Annex V, Chapter 3, Section 2 of Commission Regulation ( ) No 142/2011. The assessment of the Panel exclusively focused on the raw materials (catering waste and processed foodstuffs) intended for human consumption. The applicant did not provide any validation experiments with direct measurement of the reduction of viability of endogenous indicators or spiked surrogate bacteria. However, from thermal inactivation parameters reported in the literature, it can be concluded that the proposed composting standards can achieve at least a 5 log reduction of or Senftenberg 775W. The applicant did not consider thermoresistant viruses as a relevant hazard and therefore did not provide any data from direct measurements of the reduction of infectivity of spiked thermoresistant viruses, nor provide data from validation studies undertaken at national level or data from literature supporting the efficacy of the proposed composting standards on thermoresistant viruses. However, thermoresistant viruses should be considered to be a relevant hazard in this context and validation data should have been provided accordingly. The Panel considers that the evidence provided by the applicant does not demonstrate that the requirements of Annex V, Chapter 3, Section 2 of Commission Regulation ( ) No 142/2011 are achieved.
机译:评估了来自某些第3类动物副产物(采食废物和动物源性食品的堆肥的两种替代方法进行了评估。第一个提出的最低温度为55℃,72小时;第二60℃48小时,每个粒径为200mm。面板评估了所提出的堆肥过程,以实现堆肥材料的5次或Senftenberg(775W,HS阴性)和3日志降低菌丝病毒,如Parvovirus,如附件六,第3章,第2章第2节()第142/2011号。专注于用于人类消费的原材料(餐饮废物和加工食品)的专属面板的评估。申请人没有提供任何验证实验,直接测量内源性指标或尖刺替代细菌的活力。然而,从文献中报告的热失活参数来说,可以得出结论,所提出的堆肥标准可以达到至少5个记录减少或Senftenberg 775W。申请人没有考虑恒温病毒作为相关的危害,因此没有提供任何数据从直接测量尖刺散热病毒的感染性的直接测量,也不提供来自国家一级或来自文献中的数据的验证研究的数据,支持支持效果的验证研究提出了散热病毒的堆肥标准。然而,应该认为热敏病毒在这种情况下是相关的危险,并且应该相应地提供验证数据。小组认为,申请人提供的证据并没有证明委员会条例()委员会条例()委员会条例第3章第2章()的要求。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号